How it is so many people don't grasp this is beyond me.
How it is so many people don't grasp this is beyond me.
Also, most languages have no such distinction. For example in my native language Hungarian we either use the English word "gender" or say (the equivalent of) "social sex" and "biological sex".
It's a niche thing. I understand that some people feel sensitive about sex/gender or the differences between transsexual/transgender/transvestite/queer/crossdresser/drag-queen etc. But for the vast majority of the people this just isn't a topic of interest.
When you include the full spectrum of LGBTQI you probably have to cut that down to no more than 95%, possibly less.
When you say "for the vast majority" you presume they operate in isolation, but they don't. Most people will end up knowing at least one person that doesn't conform to the traditional gender patterns, which means it's a problem everyone faces.
So that's the explanation why most people don't "get" or even think about the distinction, but they know about gays and lesbians.
Treating sex and gender separately makes it seem like they just accidentally coincide in case of 99.x% of the people.
One needs a very special kind of schooling and/or social circle to even imagine there's a difference. It seems to be very limited to (some) Americans.
Some people suffer from phantom limb syndrome. The pain is real, but the limb is not. We've not yet reached a point where the politically correct thing to do is to pretend otherwise.
There would only be PC pressure to pretend a trans man has a penis if "having a penis" were a vital component of being a man, which it is not. In any case, the circumstances under which one finds themselves having to confirm the presence/character of another persons genitals usually either fall outside of or supersede the jurisdiction of "political correctness".
There's no reason to assume that the author has any ill will toward the LGBT community. It's a misunderstanding that people are (with good reason) very passionate about, but something that the author probably hasn't given much thought to.
This gender =/= sex is a recent concept invented by mankind.
I thought it was fairly recent concept too until I learned this tidbit in a Anthropology survey course:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender#Indigenous_cultur...
Below is a true story of a man raised as a woman, but unable to complete the sexual transition despite cultural upbringing, injections of testosterone and even testicular castration.
There is evidence in the form of the existence of transgender people. Some societies (as noted above) have been aware of the lack of an intrinsic link between apparent reproductive sex at birth and mental/social gender for quite a while, and analogous behavior is observed in some animals.
Just as you can't conversion therapy someone out of being transgender, David Reimer is evidence that you can't conversion therapy someone into being transgender.
Just because someone is born male, and raised as a boy, doesn't mean they'll agree once they can decide for themselves. They probably will, >99% of the time, but not always.
The link I describe isn't a link that ALWAYS holds. The link, like all links in science, is just a causal correlation.
So in short, being of the male sex doesn't guarantee that you will be of male gender, but it makes it highly highly like you will be of the male gender. That is the intrinsic connection and link I describe.
I think essentially we're in agreement.